:)

I was thinking about karaf-quarkus extension. But I'm not experienced
enough (with Quarkus) to provide any solution (for now).

regards
Grzegorz Grzybek

śr., 6 maj 2020 o 10:45 Romain Manni-Bucau <rmannibu...@gmail.com>
napisał(a):

> s/quarkus/karaf/ ;)
>
> Romain Manni-Bucau
> @rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau> |  Blog
> <https://rmannibucau.metawerx.net/> | Old Blog
> <http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com> | Github <
> https://github.com/rmannibucau> |
> LinkedIn <https://www.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau> | Book
> <
> https://www.packtpub.com/application-development/java-ee-8-high-performance
> >
>
>
> Le mer. 6 mai 2020 à 10:44, Grzegorz Grzybek <gr.grzy...@gmail.com> a
> écrit :
>
> > Hello
> >
> > BTW. Wiring/resolving reqs/caps at build time is perfect use-case for
> > Quarkus ;)
> >
> > regards
> > Grzegorz Grzybek
> >
> > śr., 6 maj 2020 o 10:39 Christian Schneider <ch...@die-schneider.net>
> > napisał(a):
> >
> > > I agree that for microservices the resolver should be run at build time
> > and
> > > use static for the runtime.
> > > That also avoids all the refresh issues for optional packages.
> > >
> > > Christian
> > >
> > > Am Mi., 6. Mai 2020 um 09:05 Uhr schrieb Guillaume Nodet <
> > > gno...@apache.org
> > > >:
> > >
> > > > The resolver pain can be absorbed at build time when building the
> > > assembly
> > > > if the target is a micro-service.
> > > > The maven plugin can easily be used to build a customized
> distribution,
> > > > totally removing the need for the resolver at runtime.
> > > > You were thinking to fill a gap between the dynamic/standard and the
> > > static
> > > > distributions ? I'm not yet convinced there's a real gap between
> those
> > 2
> > > > scenarii.
> > > >
> > > > Guillaume
> > > >
> > > > Le mer. 6 mai 2020 à 06:59, Jean-Baptiste Onofre <j...@nanthrax.net> a
> > > > écrit :
> > > >
> > > > > The problem is that regular resolver makes sense for
> > "dynamic/standard"
> > > > > distribution, but very painful for "cloud/light/straight" runtime.
> > > > >
> > > > > The proposal is to have a lighter version of the resolver to be
> > faster
> > > > and
> > > > > predictable.
> > > > >
> > > > > Regards
> > > > > JB
> > > > >
> > > > > > Le 5 mai 2020 à 11:50, Achim Nierbeck <bcanh...@googlemail.com
> > > > .INVALID>
> > > > > a écrit :
> > > > > >
> > > > > > +1 for most.
> > > > > > only objection to the "Simple" Resolver, therefore -1 on that.
> > > > > > I fear we do more harm then improvement.
> > > > > > As Grzegorz already said, it's the way it is, not because we love
> > > > complex
> > > > > > stuff, but because bundle resolving is complex.
> > > > > > Especially due to the new req/cap inside bundles.
> > > > > > Actually to work around some of the "crappy" req/cap with
> bundles,
> > > with
> > > > > > features did help in the past.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > regards, Achim
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Am Mo., 4. Mai 2020 um 09:44 Uhr schrieb Francois Papon <
> > > > > > francois.pa...@openobject.fr>:
> > > > > >
> > > > > >> +1 for all
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> regards,
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> François
> > > > > >> fpa...@apache.org
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> Le 04/05/2020 à 09:26, Grzegorz Grzybek a écrit :
> > > > > >>> Hello
> > > > > >>>
> > > > > >>> ad1) About JAXB. Currently,
> > > > > >>> `org.apache.karaf.features.internal.model.processing` package
> > > > contains
> > > > > >> not
> > > > > >>> that complex model for "Feature override and blacklisting",
> which
> > > > reads
> > > > > >>> etc/org.apache.karaf.features.xml file to _alter_ features
> model
> > > > using
> > > > > >>> `org.apache.karaf.features.internal.service.FeaturesProcessor`.
> > > > > >>> Nothing that can't be done without JAXB. But I'd have to
> rewrite
> > > some
> > > > > >> code
> > > > > >>> to use StAX/SAX instead.
> > > > > >>>
> > > > > >>> ad2) as long as the _model_ read from JSON feature files is
> still
> > > > > rooted
> > > > > >> at
> > > > > >>> org.apache.karaf.features.internal.model.Features class, it's
> > fine
> > > > wrt
> > > > > >>> _feature processing_ ;)
> > > > > >>>
> > > > > >>> ad3) +1 for simpler resolver. But I remember it's complex not
> for
> > > the
> > > > > >> sake
> > > > > >>> of complexity, but due to complexity of bundle model and
> > reqs/caps
> > > > > >> model. I
> > > > > >>> have a _strange case_ in
> > > > > >>> https://github.com/apache/karaf/commits/ggrzybek-conditionals,
> > > where
> > > > > >>> resolution depends on whether (or not) a feature is in
> > > > > >>> <conditional>/<condition>.
> > > > > >>>
> > > > > >>> ad4) +1
> > > > > >>>
> > > > > >>> ad5) +2
> > > > > >>>
> > > > > >>> regards
> > > > > >>> Grzegorz Grzybek
> > > > > >>>
> > > > > >>> pon., 4 maj 2020 o 07:30 Jean-Baptiste Onofre <j...@nanthrax.net
> >
> > > > > >> napisał(a):
> > > > > >>>
> > > > > >>>> Hi guys,
> > > > > >>>>
> > > > > >>>> I’m working on several improvements this week where I would
> need
> > > > your
> > > > > >>>> review and thoughts.
> > > > > >>>>
> > > > > >>>> 1. JAXB remove
> > > > > >>>> We have a JAXB dependency in Karaf core just for the features
> > > > service.
> > > > > >> As
> > > > > >>>> the features model is "static" (we don’t change features model
> > at
> > > > > >> runtime),
> > > > > >>>> I would like to remove the JAXB dependency and generate the
> > parser
> > > > at
> > > > > >> build
> > > > > >>>> time with SXC for instance. I will add a build profile to
> > generate
> > > > the
> > > > > >>>> parse when the model change (it doesn’t happen very often to
> be
> > > > > honest).
> > > > > >>>> The purpose is to provide a even lighter Karaf runtime. About
> > > that,
> > > > I
> > > > > >>>> would like also to promote a bit the minimal distribution and
> do
> > > it
> > > > > even
> > > > > >>>> lighter. I propose to push minimal as official docker image,
> > > > allowing
> > > > > >>>> people to start from minimal to create their own docker image
> > (we
> > > > will
> > > > > >>>> provide improved tools about that).
> > > > > >>>>
> > > > > >>>> 2. Features JSON
> > > > > >>>> As an alternative to features XML repo, I’ve working on
> features
> > > > JSON
> > > > > >>>> repo. It’s similar in term of content, but you will now have
> the
> > > > > choice
> > > > > >>>> between XML and JSON.
> > > > > >>>>
> > > > > >>>> 3. Simple resolver
> > > > > >>>> Several users complained about the features resolver: it might
> > be
> > > > seen
> > > > > >> as
> > > > > >>>> complex (you have to understand req/caps, etc), it’s not
> always
> > > > > >> predictable
> > > > > >>>> (due to refresh with optional import, etc). I would like to
> > > propose
> > > > an
> > > > > >>>> alternative: the simple resolver. It’s pretty simple: it just
> > > takes
> > > > > what
> > > > > >>>> you have in features definition. It’s an optional resolver,
> > > meaning
> > > > > that
> > > > > >>>> the default will be still the regular resolver. The simple
> > > resolver
> > > > > can
> > > > > >> be
> > > > > >>>> enabled in etc/org.apache.karaf.features.cfg.
> > > > > >>>>
> > > > > >>>> 4. Spec features and cleanup
> > > > > >>>> As already discussed, I would like to remove the lib/jdk9plus
> > > folder
> > > > > and
> > > > > >>>> all spec packages from etc/jre.properties to use spec features
> > > > > instead.
> > > > > >>>> That will give us more control in the specs version and
> support
> > of
> > > > > JDK.
> > > > > >>>>
> > > > > >>>> 5. ConfigAdmin persistence repository overwrite with env var
> > > > > >>>> It will be possible now to overwrite configuration with env
> var.
> > > For
> > > > > >>>> instance, if you have a property foo in my.config pid, you
> will
> > be
> > > > > able
> > > > > >> to
> > > > > >>>> overwrite this property with -Dmy.config:foo=bar at bootstrap.
> > > > > >>>>
> > > > > >>>> If you agree, I would like to include those improvements in
> > coming
> > > > > >> release
> > > > > >>>> (4.2.9 and 4.3.0.RC2).
> > > > > >>>>
> > > > > >>>> Regards
> > > > > >>>> JB
> > > > > >>>>
> > > > > >>>>
> > > > > >>>>
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > --
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Apache Member
> > > > > > Apache Karaf <http://karaf.apache.org/> Committer & PMC
> > > > > > OPS4J Pax Web <http://wiki.ops4j.org/display/paxweb/Pax+Web/>
> > > > Committer
> > > > > &
> > > > > > Project Lead
> > > > > > blog <http://notizblog.nierbeck.de/>
> > > > > > Co-Author of Apache Karaf Cookbook <http://bit.ly/1ps9rkS>
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > ------------------------
> > > > Guillaume Nodet
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > --
> > > Christian Schneider
> > > http://www.liquid-reality.de
> > >
> > > Computer Scientist
> > > http://www.adobe.com
> > >
> >
>

Reply via email to